Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lily_Bernans said:
She’s interacted with the heads of state of 112 countries and she’s had 22,000 employees working under her. The US didn’t fall apart. That’s more than the other candidates have done, though I’m still a Sanders supporter, who will vote for Hillary if she’s the nominee.

Some of her accomplishments include:

Her China speech on women.

Her role in killing bin Laden.

Management of the State Department during which time the US saw a 50 percent increase in exports to China, aggressive work on climate change, and the effort to create and implement the toughest sanctions ever on Iran—she was the principal author of the agreement with Iran.

As Secretary of State, she negotiated the cease-fire in Gaza that stopped Hamas from firing rocket after rocket into Israel. She helped secure the START treaty’s ratification, and has advanced women’s rights in countries around the globe.

She rebuilt the US’s reputation and leadership overseas after the disastrous Bush years.

That’s a start. No other presidential candidate can compare with her in foreign policy experience. And that’s from a Sanders supporter.
Click to expand...
A stanch Sanders supporter or whoever the Dems nominate. And the agreement with Iran-- good grief, that is a disaster. And as for building the image of the US around the world, I wonder what some of our out-of-country posters would say about that.
 
chero23 said:
People here and in Fox News did say they have a lot of confidence bc the fbi director said he was looking at this case “very closely”. If at the end of the day nothing happens, we should then put blame on the fbi director as well.
Click to expand...
Or on the DOJ is the FBI finds cause and the Obama DOJ ignores it, which is what I believe is LIKELY to happen.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
She’s interacted with the heads of state of 112 countries and she’s had 22,000 employees working under her. The US didn’t fall apart. That’s more than the other candidates have done, though I’m still a Sanders supporter, who will vote for Hillary if she’s the nominee.

Some of her accomplishments include:

Her China speech on women.

Her role in killing bin Laden.

Management of the State Department during which time the US saw a 50 percent increase in exports to China, aggressive work on climate change, and the effort to create and implement the toughest sanctions ever on Iran—she was the principal author of the agreement with Iran.

As Secretary of State, she negotiated the cease-fire in Gaza that stopped Hamas from firing rocket after rocket into Israel. She helped secure the START treaty’s ratification, and has advanced women’s rights in countries around the globe.

She rebuilt the US’s reputation and leadership overseas after the disastrous Bush years.

That’s a start. No other presidential candidate can compare with her in foreign policy experience. And that’s from a Sanders supporter.
Click to expand...
I can certainly agree that no other candidate can compare with her in foreign policy, and it’s a very good thing. But igniting the Iran/Sunni conflagration is not something of which one can be proud. And, of course, receiving money from China throws her policy with it into serious question since the result has not been advantageous to this country; only to her. Nor, of course, was receiving money for turning the U.S. uranium supply over to Russia, therefore Iran.

But it did make her rich. You can say that much. The only problem with it being that it costs the country so much to put a few million into a politician’s pocket or purse. It would be so much cheaper to just evaluate what corruption is worth and paying it directly to the politician.

And, of course, the U.S. has exerted no leadership overseas since 2009 other than handing countries over to radical Islamists. Her count now is four. As president, how many more of those deals can she engineer, and for what in exchange?
 
Let’s see, how much did Boeing pay her for getting some of its planes sold to China? $900,000 was the last number I knew. Of course, they have to be made in China. $900,000 to her versus loss of jobs to Boeing workers in the U.S. was not a good deal for American workers other than her.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
Traveling the world is a key part of the job of Secretary of State.
Click to expand...
Not really required to visit all these countries. See we already have in country an Ambassador, a Deputy Chief of Mission, and dozens of other professionals that really know their stuff.

Hillary’s trips were mostly for personal gain. The country would have been better served if she had actually spent time ‘managing’ the Dept of State, maybe reading some of those 400+ requests for additional security from Libya, etc. etc.
 
mary_bobo said:
Or on the DOJ is the FBI finds cause and the Obama DOJ ignores it, which is what I believe is LIKELY to happen.
Click to expand...
Right now, we have the director of the FBI following the case closely. Do you feel an indictment will come?

If you say yes, and she is not indicted then your basically contradicting yourself.
 
chero23 said:
Right now, we have the director of the FBI following the case closely. Do you feel an indictment will come?

If you say yes, and she is not indicted then your basically contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...
It probably depends on what the emails say. Obama will not allow his legacy to be tarnished, and Loretta Lynch will do what Obama wants.

I know you didn’t ask me, but I, personally, don’t believe she’ll be indicted. A lot of government officials used home servers, and an indictment of Clinton would open the door to indictments of them as well. And, there was no law against Clinton using her home server at the time she did. It wasn’t prudent, it wasn’t a good decision, but it was legal. What would have been illegal would be to delete certain classified emails. Not classified retroactively, but those specifically marked classified. They must be retained under the Federal Records Act. However, when I looked at the Federal Records Act, this is what I found:

“Violations of the Federal Records Act do not carry significant penalties beyond the political embarrassment.”

As for FOIA, once again we have to look to the pesky Supreme Court, who in the Henry Kissinger case wrote:

“We hold today that, even if a document requested under the FOIA is wrongfully in the possession of a party not an ‘agency,’ the agency which received the request does not ‘improperly withhold’ those materials by its refusal to institute a retrieval action. When an agency has demonstrated that it has not 'withheld’requested records in violation of the standards established by Congress, the federal courts have no authority to order the production of such records under the FOIA.”

William Rehnquist writing for the majority.

And from npr:

“The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton’s server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed ‘classified,’ it’s also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.”

So, no, she probably won’t be indicted.
 
chero23 said:
Right now, we have the director of the FBI following the case closely. Do you feel an indictment will come?

If you say yes, and she is not indicted then your basically contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...
I must not have been clear on what I mean. If the FBI finds cause for an indictment it will be referred to the DOJ. I do not think the Obama Administration will let there be an indictment. How is that contradictory?
 
chero23 said:
People here and in Fox News did say they have a lot of confidence bc the fbi director said he was looking at this case “very closely”. If at the end of the day nothing happens, we should then put blame on the fbi director as well.
Click to expand...
If, at the end of the day, nothing happens, we should assume there is nothing to prosecute, and there probably isn’t.

Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of one’s peers. It applies to government officials, too.
 
mary_bobo said:
I must not have been clear on what I mean. If the FBI finds cause for an indictment it will be referred to the DOJ. I do not think the Obama Administration will let there be an indictment. How is that contradictory?
Click to expand...
The Director of the Department of Justice is part of the Obama Administration. The Attorney General is an Obama appointee.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
It probably depends on what the emails say. Obama will not allow his legacy to be tarnished, and Loretta Lynch will do what Obama wants.

I know you didn’t ask me, but I, personally, don’t believe she’ll be indicted. A lot of government officials used home servers, and an indictment of Clinton would open the door to indictments of them as well. And, there was no law against Clinton using her home server at the time she did. It wasn’t prudent, it wasn’t a good decision, but it was legal. What would have been illegal would be to delete certain classified emails. Not classified retroactively, but those specifically marked classified. They must be retained under the Federal Records Act. However, when I looked at the Federal Records Act, this is what I found:

“Violations of the Federal Records Act do not carry significant penalties beyond the political embarrassment.”

As for FOIA, once again we have to look to the pesky Supreme Court, who in the Henry Kissinger case wrote:

“We hold today that, even if a document requested under the FOIA is wrongfully in the possession of a party not an ‘agency,’ the agency which received the request does not ‘improperly withhold’ those materials by its refusal to institute a retrieval action. When an agency has demonstrated that it has not 'withheld’requested records in violation of the standards established by Congress, the federal courts have no authority to order the production of such records under the FOIA.”

William Rehnquist writing for the majority.

And from npr:

“The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton’s server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed ‘classified,’ it’s also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.”

So, no, she probably won’t be indicted.
Click to expand...
Oh my, how to begin! So many talking points and they all amount to the same thing.
Let this correction be another added to the pile. The Federal Records - as you state - better be identified before you pass along that the worst that one would earn under violating same would be “political embarrassment”. What a whopper and I do not mean malted milk balls.
 
Little_Sheep said:
Oh, I’m well-versed in time-outs. As a genuine introvert, I plan them into my Life Schedule.

Again, I apologize sincerely that my post may have painted you as dishonest and not a genuine participant in the discussion. That is not okay on my part. I welcome your words and opinions, and I understand that I am not even a little bit perfect when I try to express mine.

If my post painted your words as dishonest, my apology remains sincere. I will be more gentle in future discussions.

Sweet dreams to you on this Holy Night.
Click to expand...
Thank you in all sincerity - peace be with you.
 
Expatreprocedit said:
Totally agreed. What I would add is that even if Clinton bears some responsibility for the rise of ISIS, to call her a “founding member” of ISIS is the worst sort of exaggeration, calumny, and demagoguery. Giuliani is beneath contempt.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Lily_Bernans said:
The super delegates follow the voice of the people. Many of Hillary’s super delegates voted for Obama when it became clear that the Democrats wanted him as their candidate.
Click to expand...
I do not understand why folks don’t get this!
 
Little_Sheep said:
I do not understand why folks don’t get this!
Click to expand...
I don’t, either. It’s so easy, right? Super delegates are not bound to vote for the candidate who “won them,” for lack of better words. That’s why Hillary wants to get to 2,000-plus bound delegates, and why Bernie still has a chance. It grows slimmer with every delegate Hillary wins, but he still has a chance. It’s partly why he’s not pulling out and backing Hillary, which I think he’ll eventually do.

If I don’t talk to you before, LS, have a happy and blessed Easter! 🙂
 
grotto said:
Oh my, how to begin! So many talking points and they all amount to the same thing.
Let this correction be another added to the pile. The Federal Records - as you state - better be identified before you pass along that the worst that one would earn under violating same would be “political embarrassment”. What a whopper and I do not mean malted milk balls.
Click to expand...
Feel free to tell me where I’m wrong, grotto. This is a DB after all. We don’t have to agree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top